Talk:K-7
I need you to start including a notes section explaining why these characters you've been adding recently are in the public domain. I shouldn't have to look them all up to double check. Your reasoning for including them on this wiki should already be on the pages you're creating!Cebr1979 (talk) 17:47, July 1, 2017 (UTC) :Only pre-1923 works and the golden age comic characters (because both are explained in detail in our FAQ) don't require notes sections explaining why they are in the public domain. All other pages (like Octobriana, Butterfly, Trashman, Cecilia Cerise, Wasp Woman, Clarice's Father, etc.) have very detailed notes sections explaining why those characters are in the public domain. We're dealing with characters that could get people sued! This is very important!Cebr1979 (talk) 19:56, July 1, 2017 (UTC) :You stated :"I need you to start including a notes section explaining why these characters you've been adding recently are in the public domain." :Personally, I feel Archive.org is very reputable, and their acknowledgement of PD status is plenty for me. They check their material closely, and don't identify status unless it's been verified." Perhaps I take your statement too literally, but *I* personally find it MORE than sufficient to utilize Arcive.org as a conformational resource. If there's a danger here, I'd be surprised that they would miss the danger on their site. :I think other information offered on those other pages is interesting, yet for what I get paid to post articles, I think the free labor is quite sufficient. I have offered DesertIslandFilms as a confirmation before, and you were quite satisfied with it at the time. I know things change, and I appreciate your efforts to improve this site and note you have made a positive impact. I don't want to make you work harder, yet I feel the time put into the articles is sufficient to say the least. I'm not trying to belligerent nor trying to skip out on work. An explanation of 'why I these characters are in the public domain' is in the fact that Archive.org says they are. I don't find the information given on the examples to be necessarily more convincing. I realize you are the admin here, and you have the ability to delete my input. I do not believe I have complained too often regarding your decisions in this fashion, and would not attempt to infringe should you desire to remove my work here. I don't want to waste either of our time. All I would like to do is contribute in a meaningful way without making it unnecessarily time consuming. :KNO2skull (talk) 22:32, July 1, 2017 (UTC) ::Ok, well: It's not plenty for me or this wiki. We don't trust other websites. We look into laws... only. If you are not sure where to look and see if something was renewed (or even copyrighted in the first place), I am willing to show you that but: "such and such says so and that's good enough" is just NOT good enough.Cebr1979 (talk) 01:44, July 7, 2017 (UTC)